I haven't read LJ in two weeks....
May. 5th, 2004 04:59 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rusty_haloI just handed in my last academic paper (ever?).
Assuming all goes well (which it should *knock on wood*), this is it. All classes are over, this was the last bit of academic work required to graduate.
This feels so weird. Like, my entire life has been leading up to this moment. I didn't exactly choose it, I didn't exactly want it (though I also couldn't think of any more preferable option), but here I am, I've achieved it. College graduation. What an incredible relief that this is over.
I'm a bit sad, which surprises me. I felt nothing but a sort of bitter joy at having escaped high school alive; I still feel no nostalgia for that nightmarish hell. But I actually started to appreciate college a bit near the end, maybe about 2/3 of the way through. I'll never like homework or papers or grades, but once I found the kinds of classes that suited my personality--cultural studies, gender studies--I saw the point. I appreciated the insights and the need for them and I felt like I grew as a person because of those classes.
I sort of wish I could've done it over again knowing what I know now; I spent at least the first half of college floating around totally lost, without a clue what I wanted to study or where I fit in. By the time I finally found it, it seems like I barely had time to skim the surface.
But anyway. It's over and done with now and man, am I relieved!
I spent the weekend in something of a daze: all my finals this year were papers, all were long, and all were due within the same period of time. So this weekend I wrote:
- 12 pages on the construction of masculinity in Sergio Leone's Dollars trilogy and its relationship to the cultural changes of the 1960s in America (due Monday 5/3)
- 6 pages on the theme of objectification in Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale and its relation to the academic study of history (due Monday 5/3)
- 12 pages on the relationships between dominant culture, subculture, and family in Joel Schumacher's The Lost Boys (due Wednesday 5/5)
I just returned from handing the last paper in. That's 30 pages in about four days. It was all done very last minute because I had other work to finish up the week before. That also means I've barely slept in the past four days: I was up 36 hours, from Sunday morning to Monday night, slept for about eight hours, then got up again Tuesday morning and have been awake until now (Wednesday afternoon). And now I'm at work trying to catch up because I missed Monday. Man, I can't wait to go home and sleep.
This is a babbling, nonsensical post; I offer exhaustion as an excuse.
I wish I had something related to the Spike-verse to say. Unfortunately it has utterly failed to hold my attention; the little time I've had to devote to fandom lately has been toward Methos. I really wish I could keep my attention on Spike; I love the community that surrounds this fandom. I want to continue to be a part of it. But, well, there's just nothing that Mutant Enemy could do that would make me want to watch--or even think about--their product. I'll spare you the anti-ME rant; if you read my journal you know how I feel about their ideology. I know now that there's nothing there for me and never will be. Thinking about it just makes me angry and sad.
I'd much prefer to think about Methos and Jaime Lannister, whose creators appreciated the value of an ambiguous character and the value of free will, the ability of the individual to change.![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
drujan and I went to see Hellboy the other weekend and though I didn't particularly enjoy the film, we both loved the theme that it doesn't matter how you start out, you don't have some essential essence; you have choice, you decide who you are, no one else does. Methos and Jaime both embody that; anything that ME creates embodies the opposite: the triumph of fate, inability to escape destiny, essentialism, ultimate lack of choice. (Don't argue; if you feel differently, good, enjoy yourself, you're not going to convince me.)
I bought the DVDs for Highlander seasons four and five (graduation gift to self, shut up frugal conscience) and I love them. The writers' commentaries are so delightful in contrast to the ideas ME always repeats: they celebrate the idea of an ambiguous character, they're anxious to explore that and write more for him, they see no need whatsoever to define him as "really" good or evil. He's both; he's complicated; he's grey. Yum. Yay for moral ambiguity.
The S5 DVDs were particularly intersting in the commentary on the death of Richie. The writers felt that they had to do this to take the show in a more complicated direction. There was one comment that really struck me in relation to Buffy: if Richie had lived, it would have been a "back to the beginning" theme (a la BtVS S7). Richie embodied the qualities of both Xander and Dawn: the innocent, the goofy comic relief, the student and closest family of the hero, a white character for a black and white world. By killing Richie, they intended to kill off the more simplistic character, and create a crisis in the hero's self-identity, in order to make way for a more grey world. Imagine if Buffy had killed Dawn and/or Xander at the end of BtVS S5 or S6, and then dealt with that, instead of the lame "back to the beginning, everything's black and white, just ignore all that ambiguity we dredged up previously" that we got in S7. (I don't think the Richie thing really worked, probably due to lack of funding for HL S6, but it's so cool that they were at least trying to go in that direction, to do something daring. Compare that to Joss' idiodic preservation of the "core four" at all costs and subsequent refusal to allow the show's moral universe to ever really grow. Highlander grew, from black and white to grey. I just love that.)
Anyway, I also have all these ideas swirling around in my brain on Comes a Horseman and Revelation 6:8. The DVD is awesome: it has all 19 minutes of dailies for the Jimmy scene (guh!!), interviews with cast and crew including stuff with the actors and writers about themes and character motivations, extended cuts with 10 minutes of extra footage for both episodes, and writers' commentaries for both extended cuts. An absolute treasure. The extra stuff from Revelation is particularly interesting: scenes of the break-up between Methos and Kronos. Despite the horrible staging (thank god it was cut) the actual dialogue sheds quite a bit of light on the episodes' theme, particularly that of identity. It recurs throughout both: who is Methos?
Here's the cut scene, taken from the methos.org transcript:
(Hee. Kronos is an essentialist and Methos is a social constructionist!)
The theme of identity/"is what you start out what you will always be?" recurs throughout both episodes as well:
Kronos to Methos: "You pretended to [change]. Maybe you even convinced yourself you had. But inside you're still there, Methos .... [Death is] who you are meant to be."
Kronos: (over and over) "We are the four horsemen"
Kronos: "Men like us .... Men without conscience, without fear."
"We were death on horseback."
"We think alike."
Methos: "Do you know who I was? I was Death.... That monster was me. I was the nightmare that kept them awake at night."
Duncan: "Why'd you lie to me? ... About who you were."
Duncan: "And who are you now?"
Duncan: "Don't do this. You have a choice." (Ah! Mr. Black and White says something wise!)
Cassandra: "I know what I am now. What you are.... If MacLeod knew what you really are, he'd have taken your head long ago."
Methos: "You thought I would protect you. You forgot what I was."
Silas: "How can you go against what you are?"
Methos to Cassandra: "You don't know me"
Methos to Kronos: "I'm not like that anymore; I have changed"
Methos to Duncan: "I was different then," "I have been many things, MacLeod."
Methos to Silas: "I am not your brother"
"You don't know anything about me" (in the writers' commentary they tell us that this line was originally "You don't know who I am")...
Who is Methos? He certainly seems to start out as one rotten, murdering, raping bastard. And yet ... he grows. He changes. That's not all he is, despite the insistence of his brothers who are unable to grow. He is not merely what he starts out as; that part of him is still there but he has free will, he has choice, he has the ability to recreate himself and to choose who he is going to be. That moment when he finally stands up to Silas and says "You don't know anything about me" is one of my all-time favorite moments in anything, ever.
Remember when Spike said "I don't think it matters how much how you start out"? I think S5 Spike and Methos would've gotten along pretty well.
Then there's also the idea that Kronos represents the dark side of Methos (and there's all this wonderful symbolism about Methos' dual nature: his face half painted dark and half shadowed, his simultaneous loathing and desire when he speaks of how evil he once was, etc). By locking Kronos up in this well (in the cut scene) he was trying to lock away the dark side of himself, but he couldn't destroy it. He couldn't kill Kronos because that would have been literally destroying half of himself.
(And yes, I know I tend to interpret Methos' behavior in a rather positive light, while simultaneously relishing the ambiguity of the fact that you never know for sure what's going on inside his head; what can I say, I'm a redemptionist at heart...)
And then on another note there's also this running theme: is there any fate worse than death? (Not just in this episode but as a subtext of pretty much every interaction they ever have.) Mac says yes (hero types generally do), Methos says no--survival above all else. How far would you go to stay alive?drujan and I talked about this for hours the other night, though she hasn't seen the Highlander episodes. Funnily enough I tend toward the Duncan point of view: every life matters, some ideals are worth dying for. Yet in fiction it's characters like Methos that appeal to me--characters that put their own interests first, themselves and those few people that they care most about. Maybe I wish I could be more like them, take things less seriously? I've certainly grown in that direction--I was like a Hermione type when I was younger; I'm a lot more cynical and detached now. Yet I still have ideals ... maybe it's just that the hero types are boring.
And then on a more fun note, there's also all this great stuff in the DVDs about the homoerotic subtext between Methos and Byron, which is pretty explicit ... yummy ...
Okay, must stop babbling about Highlander now. Being awake for nearly four days straight kind of fries your brain, doesn't it?.... I know I'm going to cringe when I re-read this tomorrow.
Assuming all goes well (which it should *knock on wood*), this is it. All classes are over, this was the last bit of academic work required to graduate.
This feels so weird. Like, my entire life has been leading up to this moment. I didn't exactly choose it, I didn't exactly want it (though I also couldn't think of any more preferable option), but here I am, I've achieved it. College graduation. What an incredible relief that this is over.
I'm a bit sad, which surprises me. I felt nothing but a sort of bitter joy at having escaped high school alive; I still feel no nostalgia for that nightmarish hell. But I actually started to appreciate college a bit near the end, maybe about 2/3 of the way through. I'll never like homework or papers or grades, but once I found the kinds of classes that suited my personality--cultural studies, gender studies--I saw the point. I appreciated the insights and the need for them and I felt like I grew as a person because of those classes.
I sort of wish I could've done it over again knowing what I know now; I spent at least the first half of college floating around totally lost, without a clue what I wanted to study or where I fit in. By the time I finally found it, it seems like I barely had time to skim the surface.
But anyway. It's over and done with now and man, am I relieved!
I spent the weekend in something of a daze: all my finals this year were papers, all were long, and all were due within the same period of time. So this weekend I wrote:
- 12 pages on the construction of masculinity in Sergio Leone's Dollars trilogy and its relationship to the cultural changes of the 1960s in America (due Monday 5/3)
- 6 pages on the theme of objectification in Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale and its relation to the academic study of history (due Monday 5/3)
- 12 pages on the relationships between dominant culture, subculture, and family in Joel Schumacher's The Lost Boys (due Wednesday 5/5)
I just returned from handing the last paper in. That's 30 pages in about four days. It was all done very last minute because I had other work to finish up the week before. That also means I've barely slept in the past four days: I was up 36 hours, from Sunday morning to Monday night, slept for about eight hours, then got up again Tuesday morning and have been awake until now (Wednesday afternoon). And now I'm at work trying to catch up because I missed Monday. Man, I can't wait to go home and sleep.
This is a babbling, nonsensical post; I offer exhaustion as an excuse.
I wish I had something related to the Spike-verse to say. Unfortunately it has utterly failed to hold my attention; the little time I've had to devote to fandom lately has been toward Methos. I really wish I could keep my attention on Spike; I love the community that surrounds this fandom. I want to continue to be a part of it. But, well, there's just nothing that Mutant Enemy could do that would make me want to watch--or even think about--their product. I'll spare you the anti-ME rant; if you read my journal you know how I feel about their ideology. I know now that there's nothing there for me and never will be. Thinking about it just makes me angry and sad.
I'd much prefer to think about Methos and Jaime Lannister, whose creators appreciated the value of an ambiguous character and the value of free will, the ability of the individual to change.
drujan and I went to see Hellboy the other weekend and though I didn't particularly enjoy the film, we both loved the theme that it doesn't matter how you start out, you don't have some essential essence; you have choice, you decide who you are, no one else does. Methos and Jaime both embody that; anything that ME creates embodies the opposite: the triumph of fate, inability to escape destiny, essentialism, ultimate lack of choice. (Don't argue; if you feel differently, good, enjoy yourself, you're not going to convince me.)I bought the DVDs for Highlander seasons four and five (graduation gift to self, shut up frugal conscience) and I love them. The writers' commentaries are so delightful in contrast to the ideas ME always repeats: they celebrate the idea of an ambiguous character, they're anxious to explore that and write more for him, they see no need whatsoever to define him as "really" good or evil. He's both; he's complicated; he's grey. Yum. Yay for moral ambiguity.
The S5 DVDs were particularly intersting in the commentary on the death of Richie. The writers felt that they had to do this to take the show in a more complicated direction. There was one comment that really struck me in relation to Buffy: if Richie had lived, it would have been a "back to the beginning" theme (a la BtVS S7). Richie embodied the qualities of both Xander and Dawn: the innocent, the goofy comic relief, the student and closest family of the hero, a white character for a black and white world. By killing Richie, they intended to kill off the more simplistic character, and create a crisis in the hero's self-identity, in order to make way for a more grey world. Imagine if Buffy had killed Dawn and/or Xander at the end of BtVS S5 or S6, and then dealt with that, instead of the lame "back to the beginning, everything's black and white, just ignore all that ambiguity we dredged up previously" that we got in S7. (I don't think the Richie thing really worked, probably due to lack of funding for HL S6, but it's so cool that they were at least trying to go in that direction, to do something daring. Compare that to Joss' idiodic preservation of the "core four" at all costs and subsequent refusal to allow the show's moral universe to ever really grow. Highlander grew, from black and white to grey. I just love that.)
Anyway, I also have all these ideas swirling around in my brain on Comes a Horseman and Revelation 6:8. The DVD is awesome: it has all 19 minutes of dailies for the Jimmy scene (guh!!), interviews with cast and crew including stuff with the actors and writers about themes and character motivations, extended cuts with 10 minutes of extra footage for both episodes, and writers' commentaries for both extended cuts. An absolute treasure. The extra stuff from Revelation is particularly interesting: scenes of the break-up between Methos and Kronos. Despite the horrible staging (thank god it was cut) the actual dialogue sheds quite a bit of light on the episodes' theme, particularly that of identity. It recurs throughout both: who is Methos?
Here's the cut scene, taken from the methos.org transcript:
Methos: I'm serious. It's what I want to do. Study and learn.
Kronos: What for? What have you got to learn?
Methos: Most everything, it seems. About the world. About myself. About who we are.
Kronos: I can tell you who we are.
Methos: Can you?
Kronos: I'm Kronos. I always have been, and I always will be. And you're just like me. We are who we are, and that's more than enough.
Methos: Not for me. Those who don't learn from their mistakes, repeat them.
Kronos: We don't make mistakes. We make history. Pour me another drink and have one yourself. You're getting too damned serious for your own good. You're turning into a Greek.
Methos pours Kronos more wine and, in a life-defining moment, slips in some poison from a ring.
Methos: Thank you.
Methos hands him his wine. Kronos drains it.
Kronos: Just don't forget what you really are.
Methos: I never forget what I am. The more I learn, the more aware I become.
(My emphases)
(Hee. Kronos is an essentialist and Methos is a social constructionist!)
The theme of identity/"is what you start out what you will always be?" recurs throughout both episodes as well:
Kronos to Methos: "You pretended to [change]. Maybe you even convinced yourself you had. But inside you're still there, Methos .... [Death is] who you are meant to be."
Kronos: (over and over) "We are the four horsemen"
Kronos: "Men like us .... Men without conscience, without fear."
"We were death on horseback."
"We think alike."
Methos: "Do you know who I was? I was Death.... That monster was me. I was the nightmare that kept them awake at night."
Duncan: "Why'd you lie to me? ... About who you were."
Duncan: "And who are you now?"
Duncan: "Don't do this. You have a choice." (Ah! Mr. Black and White says something wise!)
Cassandra: "I know what I am now. What you are.... If MacLeod knew what you really are, he'd have taken your head long ago."
Methos: "You thought I would protect you. You forgot what I was."
Silas: "How can you go against what you are?"
Methos to Cassandra: "You don't know me"
Methos to Kronos: "I'm not like that anymore; I have changed"
Methos to Duncan: "I was different then," "I have been many things, MacLeod."
Methos to Silas: "I am not your brother"
"You don't know anything about me" (in the writers' commentary they tell us that this line was originally "You don't know who I am")...
Who is Methos? He certainly seems to start out as one rotten, murdering, raping bastard. And yet ... he grows. He changes. That's not all he is, despite the insistence of his brothers who are unable to grow. He is not merely what he starts out as; that part of him is still there but he has free will, he has choice, he has the ability to recreate himself and to choose who he is going to be. That moment when he finally stands up to Silas and says "You don't know anything about me" is one of my all-time favorite moments in anything, ever.
Remember when Spike said "I don't think it matters how much how you start out"? I think S5 Spike and Methos would've gotten along pretty well.
Then there's also the idea that Kronos represents the dark side of Methos (and there's all this wonderful symbolism about Methos' dual nature: his face half painted dark and half shadowed, his simultaneous loathing and desire when he speaks of how evil he once was, etc). By locking Kronos up in this well (in the cut scene) he was trying to lock away the dark side of himself, but he couldn't destroy it. He couldn't kill Kronos because that would have been literally destroying half of himself.
(And yes, I know I tend to interpret Methos' behavior in a rather positive light, while simultaneously relishing the ambiguity of the fact that you never know for sure what's going on inside his head; what can I say, I'm a redemptionist at heart...)
And then on another note there's also this running theme: is there any fate worse than death? (Not just in this episode but as a subtext of pretty much every interaction they ever have.) Mac says yes (hero types generally do), Methos says no--survival above all else. How far would you go to stay alive?
drujan and I talked about this for hours the other night, though she hasn't seen the Highlander episodes. Funnily enough I tend toward the Duncan point of view: every life matters, some ideals are worth dying for. Yet in fiction it's characters like Methos that appeal to me--characters that put their own interests first, themselves and those few people that they care most about. Maybe I wish I could be more like them, take things less seriously? I've certainly grown in that direction--I was like a Hermione type when I was younger; I'm a lot more cynical and detached now. Yet I still have ideals ... maybe it's just that the hero types are boring.And then on a more fun note, there's also all this great stuff in the DVDs about the homoerotic subtext between Methos and Byron, which is pretty explicit ... yummy ...
Okay, must stop babbling about Highlander now. Being awake for nearly four days straight kind of fries your brain, doesn't it?.... I know I'm going to cringe when I re-read this tomorrow.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-05 02:15 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-05 02:15 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-05 02:41 pm (UTC)You've resurfaced! You are alive!
It really does seem like the first couple years of school are a waste. I guess that's why they give you dumb-ass classes to take. By the time I decided I really wanted to try media production, I'd already been in four years, and just didn't have the stamina/funds to start over. I'm now thinking the same thing about cultural studies/linguistics/gender--the only thing saving me is that UMO doesn't have a program in linguistics. Yeesh.
You've resurfaced! You live! You are very nearly free! We'll celebrate (again) in a month!
how are your little monsters?
(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-06 09:09 am (UTC)It really does seem like the first couple years of school are a waste. I guess that's why they give you dumb-ass classes to take.
Well, I was lucky that I had almost no requirements to fulfill. Gallatin is all about "take any class in any school of NYU"--in theory it's supposed to help people who already know what they want to do to avoid all the required boring stuff and get right to what they're interested in. (Of course it's also useful for people with no clue what they want to do who want to sample a lot of different things, which is what I did.)
I thought at first I was interested in history or mythology so I was taking a lot of stuff like "Ancient Celtic Myths and Culture" and "Ancient Egyptian Religion." All of which seemed tedious and irrelevant once I was actually studying it. But luckily this led me to Anthropology, which led to Cultural Studies and Gender Studies and a way to integrate my interest in film and pop culture. But by then I was halfway through.
And it doesn't help that in the first two and a half years it's nearly impossible to get any of the classes you want. They fill up so quickly that you're basically paying [insane amount of money per year] to take third and fourth choice classes.
I am so looking forward to seeing you again. Can't wait to party at MR! :)
(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-06 09:56 am (UTC)I think that Angel is happier than she was--she gets more personal attention, less harrassment. Lucifer is having a harder time--he misses the big house, the dog, the excitement, the possibility to escape and play outside. But he likes that he's getting all this extra attention from me. I think he'll be okay. I'm sad that he's so bored but I'm doing my best to play with him and keep him entertained.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-05 02:58 pm (UTC)Anyway, whenever a show royally screws up a character or story that's when I really do turn to fanfic where it can be fixed. (And I suppose that's why I floated the idea of doing a virtual AtS season 6 so that fans can find better resolution than we'd ever find with ME.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-06 06:22 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-06 07:56 am (UTC)It seems almost obscene to have these stunningly talented fanfiction writers devoting all this attention to a character who simply isn't worth it. It makes me question what I ever liked about the character to begin with--he seemed so complex and fascinating, but maybe we were all just imaginging that--projecting, wishful thinking. 'Cause the guy on AtS this year is just a dull one-dimensional idiot. It's hard to imagine that he could have ever had qualities that I once found fascinating. I mean, I used to read fics where Spike had all these deep qualities under the surface, and that seemed perfectly plausible. Now? Anything other than getting drunk, playing video games, and getting into fights seems out of character. And when I remind myself that James Marsters used to be able to act ... well, based on this season of AtS that too is pretty hard to imagine.
(I hope it's clear that no offense is meant to people who still like him. My anger is at ME, not other fans.)
(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-05 03:40 pm (UTC)Love your essay topics; would you mind sending them over? Always interested in analyses of books and films, and I always found your thoughts and ideas regarding fandom worthwhile. Of course, I understand if you don't really want to, but I can promise I won't use them, though, what with being this law student (int'l public law/EU law)...
(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-06 07:59 am (UTC)I guess I could send the Sergio Leone one and the Margaret Atwood one. I was re-reading the Lost Boys one last night and embarrassed by how bad that one was, though, so I think that one should never see the light of day....
Thanks for being interested. :)
(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-06 08:49 am (UTC)It's a tough job, but someone's gotta do it.
/deadpan
And, cool-- just send it to [lj handle]@hotmail.com!
(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-05 04:43 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-06 07:59 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-05 06:01 pm (UTC)Re the Highlander stuff, just wanted to let you know that I read your mini-essay with interest. A few months ago I began watching the series from the beginning via netflix and am currently in the middle of season 4. Revelations 6:8 was the first ep I ever saw, just catching it in the middle of the night on some basic cable station and I stopped to watch it b/c I'd heard a lot about that Methos fellow.
Hmm, don't really have a point, just saying yay, talk about HL all you want b/c I'm reading. I do have one minor bitch about the DVD extra content - Gaumont spoils their own show in the watcher commentaries, etc. But that means that I can read what you write about S5 because the show's makers have already spoiled me.
I agree with all you said about the Spike/ME vs. Methos/Gaumont worldview. Per the season 3 commentaries, it was Wingfield's very ambiguity in playing Methos that inspired them to bring him back and make him more of a major character. And, unlike ME did with Spike, it sounds like they didn't destroy the very quality that made the character so interesting in the first place.
Hmm. I had no idea I had so much to say. Forgive my babbling and congratulations, again.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-06 09:22 am (UTC)That's great that you just discovered the show. I can't imagine watching from the beginning knowing that Methos was one of the horsemen--I watched it as it aired and one of the greatest fictional surprises I've ever experienced was in "Comes a Horseman." I mean, it made sense--it was just so perfect to discover something like that about a character that I'd already loved for a couple of years.
I love that it's the ambiguity of the character that led them to bring him back. How cool is that? And they made him more ambiguous, not less. They never felt the need to "solve" the character, declare him one or the other--they let him stay grey. That's what I love, and what ME could never do--to them everything has to be one or the other, binary, black or white.
That's too bad that the DVDs are full of spoilers. I noticed this too--Adrian Paul's comments about Chivalry on the S4 DVDs give away Comes a Horseman, which took place over a season later. I guess it's been so long everything blurs together and they figure canon is set, no need to worry about spoilers. I can see how it'd be irritating when you're discovering it now for the first time though!
I'm fascinated by the Watcher commentaries on the DVDs. Some of the supplemental material in there is so interesting! I'm really happy with these DVD sets.
Thanks for commenting. I appreciate it. :)
(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-06 06:20 am (UTC)I had exactly the same experience, btw ... feeling that I was poodling around in a fog until halfway through second year (Uni is only 3 years here), not really understanding what the lecturers wanted or what I was supposed to be getting out of the experience, or how to go about pulling it all together in a meaningful way.
I'm on the same page as shipperx ... Spike is ours now. ME has dropped the ball, but then ME didn't have a firm grasp on the ball - or was grasping the wrong ball altogether - right from the beginning, so I was never all that invested in their point of view. I watch the show in the same spirit that I read fic ... 'oh, cool!' interspersed with a lot of 'meh' and 'hell no!' reactions.
Your Highlander comments are intriguing. I know nothing about Highlander, but you're tempting me to take a look at it. I'll see how much cash I have left after the WriterCon auction.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-06 09:29 am (UTC)I guess ... it's not just that ME has dropped the ball on Spike's story. They did that all through season six yet I still loved the character. Problem is the writers--plus the actor--have turned Spike into a shallow parody of himself this year. I have difficulty imagining him doing anything beyond getting drunk, playing video games, and fighting. I said this to shipperx, too -- Spike just doesn't interest me anymore.
Oh, you should so check out Highlander! The season four DVDs just came out; you could get those (if you get them through Best Buy you get extra footage). Methos is so wonderful--a true grey character, like I wish they had done with Spike.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-06 10:04 am (UTC)And for other characters, too. For example, in Jane Espenson's DVD commentary for 'Intervention' she says that they had written the line "What are you kidding? She's nuts!" to give to a character in response to the Scoobies finding out that Buffy was bonking Spike, and they decided to give it to Tara ... because it would be unexpected and therefore funny. I have very little respect for writers who play so lightly with their characters ... and Espenson is supposed to be one of the good ones! So I'm not going to lose any sleep over Fury and DeKnight's antics, and I'm not going to even listen to JM's opinions.
I definitely agree that AtS 5 Spike has been a low point, but Spike on the show is, for me, some loser alternate dimension Spike who went down the wrong leg of the Trousers of Time. I think I appreciate him a little bit more than you do, but of course I'm peeved that they're largely wasting the character. If it weren't for fanfic and the general fandom community I'd have given up on the character altogether.
So, when can we expect the All About Methos archive? :)
(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-06 10:37 am (UTC)LOL. Don't give me a panic attack!
I've had a hard time getting into Methos fic. A lot of it is historical which isn't terribly appealing to me. Also, there's still quite a bit of canon for me to explore before the fic becomes the only option for more--among other things, I still have never seen Methos' three final episodes! Plus, the DVDs are just loaded with hours of treasures--alternate scenes, deleted scenes, supplementary information, interviews with writers and actors, alternate cuts of episodes, episodes with commentary--it's awesome. I don't really have that burning desire for more that can only be fulfilled with fic (yet).
I sort of agree about Spike. Late season five was really the only time he truly shone as a character that also (seemed to) matter to the writers. But even during S6, when his personality and motivation jumped around ridiculously from episode to episode, he had some great moments. And even in the dark pit of S7 he had stuff like the end of Beneath You. You could read layers into the character even if the writers didn't value or acknowledge them. Whereas now I just plain don't see any layers at all. The writers are still twisting him around at whim, and there's no longer any reason I'd want to put up with that.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-05-06 10:51 am (UTC)I still see some layers in A5 Spike ... they're a bit deeper, or maybe they're more wishful thinking, but I still see his soft side and his humour underneath the broad strokes of the writers. Or at least, I can see where the fan community can insert those layers, given the basic skeleton from ME's plots. But I don't want it to seem like I'm trying to argue you into feeling something you obviously don't feel ... I respect that it's over between you and Spike, and I'm afraid I'm using your journal to marshall my reasons why I'm not yet over him.
(Although I'm so over JM ... in an interview with an Australian newspaper he said he loves Spike and will always love Spike. The hell? A few weeks ago he said Spike was 'essentially shallow' or the like ... he hasn't said anything good about Spike since ... forever? Augh!)